Christian Couder <> writes:

>>> +'git interpret-trailers' [--trim-empty] [--infile=file] 
>>> [<token[=value]>...]
>> Would it be more consistent with existing documentation to format this as so?
>>   [--infile=<file>] [<token>[=<value>]]...
> No, it would be very inconsistent:
> $ grep '\.\.\.\]' *.txt | wc -l
> 103
> $ grep '\]\.\.\.' *.txt | wc -l
> 0

I have a feeling that you are missing the point Eric is making.  The
value given to the --infile option can be anything, i.e. 'file'
there is a placeholder, hence "--infile=<file>" not "--infile=file"
as you wrote.

Also I think "[<token>[=<value>]]..." is the correct way to spell
that there can be 0 or more "<token>[=<value>]".  "<token[=value]>"
in the original does not make any sense, as <> is meant to say "this
thing is a placeholder", and we do not try to say, with the string
inside <>, what shape that placeholder takes.  In fact '=' part is
_not_ a placeholder but is required syntactically when you want to
supply a value to the token, so the original doubly is incorrect.

I find it a bad taste to allow unbound set of <token> on the LHS of
'=' on the command line, but that is a separate issue in the design,
not in the documentation of the design.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to